The founding fathers did NOT arm the populace as part of the "checks and balances" system of democracy.

The "well regulated militia" spoken of in the Constitution's Second Amendment refers to the armed citizenry available to respond to raids by Indians and foreign powers.

Both were actual threats at the time, and the founders were more scared of a standing army (expensive) than of armed farmers (cheap).

Today, standing armed forces operate beyond our borders, and the National Guard is the descendent of the citizen-militia.

The right to keep and bear arms still exists, but in two circumstances not imagined by the founders: We are safe within our borders from the threats endured by 18th Century America, and firearms have achieved killing potency undreamed by the fighters at Bunker Hill.

We get to rethink the situation. We have to act, within the framework of the Constitution, to further regulate the situation.

Regulating guns is not unconstitutional! There is no right to own 30-round magazines or armor-piercing bullets, and we are obligated to regulate otherwise to protect our society from rampage killings.

The Second Amendment specifies "a well regulated" militia, and pro-Constitutional conservatives should welcome regulation of firearms in that spirit.

Forever lose the macho fantasy that it is only your AR-15 standing between you and tyranny: Vote -- don't shoot -- to preserve your freedom.